My Related Sites

What is a Mixer in a Box?

There
is
a software package designed for mixing live sound on a computer.
This software provides a very powerful and full featured solution
for the live sound engineer. SAC, the Software Audio Console, is a
software package that turns a good Windows computer into a good
digital mixing console. When you fire up a SAC rig you are NOT
running sound on a computer. You are running sound on a digital
console.

The major difference between SAC and other digital mixers is that
SAC was programmed from the ground up to be a virtual mixing
environment. I don't believe that SAC was ever intended to be a
replacement for a hardware digital console. It was, and is, intended
to be another option for mixing live sound. SAC is a new paradigm in
the mixing of live sound.

The developer of this software is the developer of the Software
Audio Workshop.
The
SAW studio software has been in use for around 15 years with
constant development. The SAC software has been introduced recently
as a live mixing solution. The knowledge gained from the development
of the studio software has been incorporated in the live software
package. For more information about the SAWStudio software visit The SAWStudio Website.
For complete information about the SAC software visit The
Software Audio Console Website.

My Mixer in a Box

Early in February of 2009 a friend told me that I should check out
this software. I read through the information on the website and got
enthused about the product. I have built several computers and
upgraded some other computers in the last few years (see my
computer building hobby site). I decided to combine my
business, sound
reinforcement, and my hobby of building computers to build my
own SAC system. (Now, with this site I am combining another hobby,
the hobby
of
building websites.)

I built and begun to use my
own SAC system. I have three levels of business. The most active of
these levels is the event and convention segment. I also
occasionally do a smaller club or party date and I do a more complex
concert date from time to time. I targeted this first SAC system at
the event and convention business. I put together a 32 input system
to use for these events. I built the computer in a rack mountable
server case and mounted the computer and the four strips of
pre-amp/converters in a small rack case that I had in the warehouse.
I have begun to use this for my primary mixer. I intend to assemble
a more compact system for the smaller shows and also to use for
second stages at larger events. I will also build a full concert
system if I can convince touring engineers to use the system.

While the software supports hardware control surfaces it is
designed to be used with a keyboard and mouse as the primary input
devices. The navigation is set up so that you can quickly get to any
section of the virtual board from any place that you might be. Last
week I mixed a fairly complex church convention with only the
computer.

The Major Features of the Mixer in a Box

The software will handle up to 72 mono or 36 stereo input channels
or a combination of mono and stereo inputs up to the total count of
72 inputs. It is designed as a full stereo system, front to back. If
you have a true stereo source you can control it with one fader.
Each channel has a patchable compressor and noise gate. There is a
delay unit and a 7 band para-graphic EQ as part of the package.
There are many reverbs available both freeware and paid including
the SAWStudio reverb plugin. The software supports DX and vst
plugins as long as they do not add latency within their algorithm.

The package includes the Front of House console and 24 identical
monitor consoles. This allows unprecedented flexibility in providing
both the audience and musicians with the best quality sound. The
system is also fully remote controllable. It is even possible to use
the remote control functions over a wifi network. This allows the
engineer to mix the show from any place in the venue. It also allows
a monitor tech to adjust the monitor mix from a position next to the
musicians during the sound check.

For full information about the software visit the
SAC website and check out the
user
group forum. The developer offers a free demo and a manual in
the form of a pdf from the downloads area of the site. The demo has
some limitations but you can experience the look and feel of using
the virtual mixer.

Would you do sound on a computer?

Comments (18)

Our company special in potentiometer and EQ product and manufacturer.
welcome to click our website on alibaba.
so that we are achieveing on business each other.
www.howang.en.alibaba.comemail: howangdz@163.com

I have looked at the available information, but for me the jury is still out. From what I see the design objectives are completely different for the project. AMP is designed to be a virtual hardware controller. It appears that one of the primary objectives is to give the engineer the same mixing environment no mater what hardware is used.

From the information that I have seen it seems that the DSP mix engine is more or less an after thought or step-child although the beta testers all give it glowing reports. It appears that VST support has been coming any day now for at least a couple of months now while the beta testers say that they can hardly keep up with the updates to the GUI/hardware controller portions of the program.

SAC is designed to be a virtual mixing environment. If you bought SAC because it was/is an affordable option for a feature rich digital mixer but feel that hardware faders are something you must have perhaps AMP will be a better option. If you use SAC as it was designed, as an alternative mixing system, it will depend on the feature set of the new option as to weather AMP is a competitive product.

Overall I think that the future of virtual mixing is bright. All of the newest hardware gives some sort of virtual option, usually in the form of iPad support. More engineers are getting used to doing some of their work in the virtual realm. Some are realizing that a physical fader or knob is not an absolute necessity to mix sound.

There is almost certainly a way, but SAC would be overkill for your purposes. Most modern DJs run partially or completely. MAudio I believe makes some small boxes that would handle your requirements.

The basic requirements would be a multi-channel sound card and some sort of mixing software to set levels and perhaps mutes. I think most sound cards include some sort of control software that might fill your requirements.

david valowrote on 11/17/2012 @ 11:18:51 am

I have experience with working with live bands doing sound re-inforcement.Ialso went to Audio
School yrs. ago. But then mostly all Iacustome to was ANALOG. In fact my Home Stereo is 99% ANOLOG. With Professional and Consumer Sources all tied together.am thinking of getting a 6 Stereo Channel Mixer for this.But I want to know if there is an alternative.to run my sources by computer.

adilsonwrote on 06/04/2012 @ 07:21:49 am

bom dia

Theronwrote on 01/24/2012 @ 02:24:36 pm

Hello,
I will be short! I am looking for a computer program that will take the place of the old audio mixer soundboards. With that said, I would love to be able to plug my microphones (about 16 of them) directly into my computer somehow and then run out of the computer into the amplifier. And then from the amplifier to the speakers. Please tell me there is a way to do this. I am not looking for a way to record. Just produce a live concert with my laptop instead of a soundboard. Please anyone with an answer of yes email me at theron_poe@hotmail.com If you don\'t know how to do it for sure please don\'t email me.
Disclaimer:* If you start sending me junk email or I tell you to stop emailing me and you refuse, proper authorities will be notified. I will keep all emails. Please do not try to harass me.

i have never used this software before and my question is how do conncet microphones keyboard and other live instrument to the computer to give you your desired result. i ll like to know. i have a desktop computer and also a laptop and the souncard there has just 1 input for microphone and headphone.
please i ll like you to educate me more on configuration setup and control.
my email is anotherebony@yahoo.com

Paul Johansen. Stage Sound Ent Ltd.wrote on 01/11/2012 @ 03:06:25 am

I think it has a lot to do with what is expected and acceptable. I would worry about setting up a small touch screen in front of a stage, say 15 meters wide with 25,000 people out in front of it.
There would also be the skepticism and arrogance of the various band engineers to contend with as well. With the exception of the few educated PC savy types who actually understood what you were up to, it would be difficult to ignore the howls of laughter from the engineers of some of the top bands in the country when they were instructed to sit down and finger the screen! I would certainly have to anticipate being asked, and just what planet did you come from? Or are you kidding me?
I can see it going this way though, albeit gradually.
Twenty thousand bucks is a lot of money to pay for an A and H ILive T112 control surface, that in reality is little more than mouse and monitor!
However if there is such a set up already up and active in NZ, there are some events for which I would consider using it live. It is always fun breaking down the barriers and dumb founding the critics and doubting Thomases!
Roll on good sounding technology that eliminates unreliable cumbersome electro-mechanical apparatus I say!
Cheers, Paul Johansen. Stage Sound Ent Ltd. Auckland NZ.

Nedwrote on 01/03/2012 @ 11:48:00 am

Paul,
I just stumbled across this site, but I have been mixing on SAC for almost a year now. And for me the is no going back. SAC has a load meter that will tell you how its doing, left clicking on it will show a popup with buffer status.

\"I am curious to learn how they got over the latency issues, especially since the SAC system does not even appear to require a quad core PC?\"

SAC is written in assembly language, which makes it run with very low overhead.

Latency: the RME sound cards have their own processors on them saving the computers cpu a lot of work.
I normally have mine set to 1x64 buffers, that gives me 5.25ms through put delay. Measured with SMAART.
If I am just providing stacks and racks, I can set it to 1x32 for 3.25ms, no dropped buffers. But I can only get
away with that using just the FOH mixer [there are FOH + 24 monitor mixers in SAC] a few inputs & outs.

CPU cores: modern multi core cpus share the memory, if a background process using another core then SAC interrupts for memory access. The other cores have to wait, till it is done. That can cause slipped buffers. SAC
works best on XP Pro with all unnecessary services disabled & one core active, hyperthreading off.

It is best to either be a computer guy or have one handy when setting a sac host up.

Ned

Paul Johansen. Stage Sound Ent Ltd.wrote on 12/28/2011 @ 03:28:12 am

I own a live sound company in Auckland NZ and we do rock concerts and all manner of other live events using PA systems built to suit the application each time. I\'d love to loose the big FX racks and huge consoles such as the Midas Heritage 3000 and replace them with something far smaller.
I have been wondering how this PC based technology was developing. A German guy setting up lights at a big Whangerie concert we did recently, walked up to us and told me this had been done in Germany using PC\'s with an A to D breakout box.
I am curious to learn how they got over the latency issues, especially since the SAC system does not even appear to require a quad core PC? Can you enlighten me about this please?
Regards Paul Johansen. MD Stage Sound Ent Ltd. Auckland NZ. www.soundman.co.nz

Kaielwrote on 04/15/2011 @ 01:39:20 pm

What is the hardware interface?

Site Adminwrote on 09/29/2010 @ 06:50:32 pm

Fred,

There a few theatre sound designers that are happily and successfully using the SAC system in theatre applications. For theatre work a control surface is usually needed, but SAC does have the capability to work well with a control surface. I would suggest that you go to the SAC forum and check some of the posts by Richard B. Ingram. He is a sound designer in the Cleveland, Ohio area. Some of the shows he has worked use volunteers for board operators. Most of them get along fine with the SAC rigs. He particularly likes the power brought to the table by the scenes system.

I hope this helps!

Wink

Fred Dole wrote on 09/29/2010 @ 02:09:59 pm

I am the Artistic Director at a small but wonderful community theatre in Idaho. We produce six Main Stage shows each year, (four of them musicals.) We are currently producing \"Rent\" and having a fabulous time. Our Mackie 32 channel mixer is maxed out and failing regularly. It seems as though we loose a channel every night. On the closed Monday and Tuesday evenings we rush the beast to our local music dealer who somehow patches it back together. Looking at our options down the road, this software based system something we should be considering? Would this system be good in a theatre application? If rank amateurs were running the \"board\" would I be begging for trouble?

The sound, features and flexibility make this an unbelievable option for live mixing. Goodbye noisy pots, failed channel strips, non-upgradable interface... and all the other downfalls of a hardware mixer... this is the cat\'s meow!!!!